Wednesday, October 19, 2005

On Madonna

Richard Roeper ruminates on Madonna here, noting in particular the irony that she doesn't allow her own children to read magazines or watch TV.

That's not the part that bothers me, though. Nor is it any element of hypocrisy in her preaching about the right way to live; for my money, I say good for her for getting it together.

No, what bothers me is the fact that Madonna -- who played a major role in the mainstreaming of sleazy behavior and the wearing of lingerie as street attire -- now wants to wrap herself in the mantle of motherhood and purity, with nary an apology to all the young women she misled and all the parents she made miserable. She has changed her ways, and is lucky enough to have the money and the backing to raise her children and put her S&M outfits away without a second thought. Too bad many of the women who followed her lead can't say the same.

It must be pleasant to go through life with either so little accountability or so little understanding.

9 Comments:

Um, OK. But if Spears preferred Clinton, she'd still be untalented. Anyhoo --

Sorry Carol, but Madonna is still leading as an extreme in the other direction. Keeping kids from TV completely doesn't "save" them from corruption; it only (artificially) builds a strong desire for TV.

The best approach IMHO is to let them watch TV, with the parents dictating the times and the choices. Letting them view anything they want is dangerous; forbidding them from seeing anything at all is also dangerous.

People who follow her example will also regret their source of inspiration, as those lingerie wannabes would regret getting inspiration from Madonna as you stated, Carol.

I agree with you. Brittany is untalented no matter how you slice it. But Madonna is an "entertainer". She is not actually "the" Madonna. I think we're taking her way too seriously here. As an entertainer she is supposed to be provocative and controversial. It is called "Art" and it has been controversial and provocative long before the U.S. was a glimmer in anyone's eye.

As such, Madonna and everyone else should be free to express themselves (no pun intended) as they see fit. Some of it will be tasteless and no doubt offensive. Much Art has been over the past 200 years. Lighten up folks, its entertainment not the the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Believe me, Western Civilization started deteriorating long before Madonna came along. In fact, if you knew anything about her music, which I'm sure Carol doesn't - Many of her messages are very positive and empowering for young people.

Carol's piece is a thinly veiled attempt at liberal celebrity bashing (or is it her Jewish mysticism..?) I mean, I don't think Madonna is particularly political so why doesn't she attack Bono some more, I mean, Egads he's trying to feed starving people...how communist can you get?? Its a free country, remember? why are you so offended by people who aren't "mainstream". What is it that threatens you so? Live and Let Live, that's how Jesus would have it.

Yes, I remember that part of the Bible where Jesus said, "Live and Let Live" quite distinctly. Draino, if you think that is what Jesus would say, you need to spend a little more time investigating His words for yourself rather than believing what so many people have twisted His messages around to mean.

Art is often provocative and offensive and people have a right to express themselves. But I would hope that we understand that with rights also come reponsibilities and the larger your influence the more deeply concerned you should be with how you are handling your responsibilities. "Entertainment" obviously has an enormous impact on the masses. If as an entertainer you choose to affect people in a way that is detrimental to society and them as individuals, then shame on you, I don't care if you have a right to do it or not. I have the right to call people names and be an obnoxious prig, but the fact such behavior is legal certainly does not make it right. And I would hope someone would call me on it rather than shrugging their shoulders and saying, "it's a free country."

Well I'd rather live in a free country than your repressed utopia full of Orwellian "thought police" and bible thumping busy bodies telling me what to watch, what to read and how to act. The "masses" as you so condescendingly call them, are conscious adults who can think for them themselves. They nor I, need your help.

Nothing in my comment recommended Orwellian thought police or even Bible thumping. I merely said that with rights come responsibilities. I firmly believe in rights. But we should exercise them with caution, not reckless abandon. You're very hostile towards someone you know little to nothing about. Maybe you ought to cool your jets.

What is it about you right wingers? The woman is now a model of modesty but you want to stand up and perform self-criticism? Perhaps like those wrong minded folks in the China's cultural revolution she should paint a sign hang it around her neck and let good God fearing people like yourself throw rotten fruit.

I know you won't understand this, as your helmet head of hair, puritan politics, and Victorian sensibilities seem to have been established early on in life, but most people's lives are revealed to them in stages and rebellion is one of those stages (wasn't your buddy GW a drunk pot smoker for a while?). I for one am happy to have found Madonna in my teen years to help me work through all that.

Also you show your colors as a millionaire's daughter by assuming that one "money and backing" to raise her kids in a decent way. Some of us without lots of money and with little family manage to do just fine.

I agree with much of what you say. However, as much as I diagree with Carol Liebau on most political issues, she has provided a forum for all of us on the political spectrum and she personally puts herself out there to do so. With that in mind I think we should all respect her enough to stay away from personal attacks.